[PATCH] First set of patches for type uniquing

[Manman Ren]

Hi David B,

Didn't read your email before submitting my change. Does r189498 look okay
to you?

Manman


On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:32 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:01 AM, David Majnemer
> <david.majnemer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:34 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> >>> > Why are we using the Itanium mangler for uuidof exprs?  Can we not do
> >>> > that?
> >>>
> >>> We have a test case (see
> >>> clang/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-template.cpp) because we seem to
> >>> support the language feature on itanium platforms. If we shouldn't
> >>> allow that language extension in that case, we should disable it &
> >>> move this test out to a separate case.
> >>>
> >>> (+David Majnemer who implemented this test/debug info support)
> >>>
> >>> > If not, feel free to grab the approach used in the MS mangler and
> >>> > pretend to
> >>> > mangle a global variable called _GUID_1234....
> >>>
> >>> I'm OK-ish with this, but deferring to you & David if you want to
> >>> avoid these language extensions cropping up outside of win32
> >>> platforms.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi David M,
> >>
> >> Any comment on whether we should move it out to a separate case?
> >
> >
> > We have yet to define a vendor mangling for it so I wouldn't worry about
> > testing it when targeting the itanium ABI.
>
> Are there places this could lead to a crash in the existing code?
> Should we disable the language feature on Itanium targets to ensure
> this doesn't happen? (& modify the test case so the GUID stuff is only
> tested on win32 ABI targets)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20130828/7de9bc0a/attachment.html>